is it possible to teleport a person without killing them by transferring the neural arrangement flawlessly in a data packet?
what would differentiate this from your brain rewriting neural mappings other than time?
i thought his because of a situation where if you lose half your body to an accident, you try to salvage your CNS as much as possible to retain motor functions and cognition if its impaired as well, but in the case where you lose all of it you can't really try and condense it physically, but digitally would it be possible? like say you knew you were going to die and had yourself not just recorded, but actually converted into a storage device so that the whole copy/destruction process doesn't occur. would this circumvent the problem?
of course you can't teleport this object, but as you refine this so called CNS compression process and improve transportation methods, would it be possible to at some point treat it as an approximation of teleportation?
>is it possible to teleport
no
nope, it will still be a different human being, since the signals aren't "original' anymore
Why do people still believe in emergent identities? Isn't it obvious that they aren't real because of all the problems the idea faces?
>>8613526
You aren't moving the individual, you are copying and pasting them somewhere else. You kill the original and make a copy in their place.
This is why I'd never teleport in Star Trek. They proved this when they made a second Commander Riker.
Is the transporter problem the single easiest way to expose pseuds?
>>8613526
we are not just data
consciousness is caused by chemical reactions in the brain, if you destroy it suddenly, you are lost in the process
>>8613703
Do you have any evidence that the chemical reactions in the brain produce a soul or whatever the fuck you call the magical substance that makes each human unique?
>>8613708
if the other option is to gain chromosomes and believe on magical souls, then yes
>>8613717
You can't read OR write.